Comparison of accuracy and precision in measuring wear using 4 commonly used uncemented cup designs shows small differences in mean and data scatter for marker and model-based RSA. The disadvantage with conventional RSA is that implant has to be supplied with tantalum markers, which may be difficult to visualise. This problem can be resolved with model-based RSA, but it is uncertain if this method has the same precision as marker-based RSA to measure wear. We compared these methods and studied different prosthesis geometries represented by four different uncemented cup designs (Trilogy, TMT-Trabecular Metal, Zimmer, Warsaw, USA, Ringloc, Biomet, Inc., Warsaw, Indiana, and ABG, Howmedica International, Staines, UK).Summary
Introduction
